Simmons v. His Creditors

12 La. Ann. 755
CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana
DecidedNovember 15, 1857
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 12 La. Ann. 755 (Simmons v. His Creditors) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Simmons v. His Creditors, 12 La. Ann. 755 (La. 1857).

Opinion

Voorhies, J.

William Florence, classed on the tableau of distribution as a privileged creditor of the insolvent, claims the dismissal of the appeal, on the ground that no bond has been given either in his favor or that of the creditors and appellees. The appellants’ bond is in favor of the syndic alone.

We think this case falls within the rule announced in the case of Armstrong v. His Creditors, 8 An. 368. See the authorities there quoted.

But it has been urged by the appellant’s counsel, that the motion for the dismissal was too late, on the authority of the case of Creevy v. Breedlove, 12 An. The decision in that case was based on the rule announced in the case of John Temple v. Marshall & James, 11 An. 613, (see authorities there quoted,) to the effect that the appeal would not he dismissed for irregularities in the transcript, such as the want of an order of appeal, &c., unless such motion were made within three days after the record was filed. But in the present case, the motion rests on entirely different grounds, namely, that William Florence, who has an interest in maintaining the judgment, has not been made a party to the appeal. In the case of Widow Robert, Executrix, v. Ride & Mairot, 11 An. 409, we said: “It is needless to inquire whether the motion to dismiss in this case should have been filed within three days after the transcript was brought up from the inferior court, inasmuch as the practice of this court has been to notice, ex officio, and without any motion to dismiss having been made, the want of proper parties for a final decree.” See cases there quoted.

Appeal dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Comire v. Schiro Amusement Co.
6 La. App. 441 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1927)
McCutchen v. Hudson
61 So. 157 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1913)
August v. Sorsby
2 McGl. 335 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1884)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
12 La. Ann. 755, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/simmons-v-his-creditors-la-1857.